SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SRI)(SC) 20765

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an application made in terms of Articles 17 and 126 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka.

Maligawa Tours and Exports (PVT) Ltd.

No. 19, Race Course Avenue, Colombo 07. PETITIONER SC APPLICATION NO.

SC (FR) 158/2013 Vs.

1. The Land Reform Commission No. C82, Hector Kobbekaduwa Mawatha, Colombo 07.

2. L.R.Sumanasena, Director, District Land Reform Board, I.R.D.P. Building, Udapussella Road, Nuwaraeliya.

3. Hon. Attorney General, Attorney General’s Department, Colombo 12.

RESPONDENTS BEFORE: Hon. Buwaneka Aluwihare, PC, J.

Hon. Vijith K. Malalgoda, PC, J.

Hon. Janak De Silva, J.

COUNSEL: Uditha Egalahewa, PC with Amaranath Fernando for the Petitioner.

Dr. Sunil Cooray with Sudarshani Cooray for the 1st and 2nd Respondent.

Ms. Indumini Radeny, SC for the Hon. Attorney-General.

ARGUED ON: 07.09.2022. WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: 07.06.2017

05.06.2017 DECIDED ON: 03.08.2023 Judgement Aluwihare, PC, J., In this matter, the court granted leave to proceed for the alleged violation of the Petitioner’s fundamental right enshrined in Article 12(1) of the Constitution. In addition to a declaration that the Petitioner’s fundamental rights guaranteed under the said Article had been violated by the Respondents, Petitioners also sought by way of further relief, that the letter issued by the Chairman Land Reform Commission dated 22nd April 2013[X5] be declared null and void and to quash the letter dated 29.04.2013, issued by the Director of the District Land Reform Board (Nuwara Eliya) [X7].

Background facts The Petitioner contends that the Petitioner is the lawful owner of two parcels of land called ‘Madalanda Estate’ and ‘Keenagaskebella’.

On 22nd April 2013, the Chairman of the Land Reform Commission, the 1st Respondent (hereinafter referred to as the ‘LRC’), by way of a letter (marked and produced as ‘X5’) requested Deshamanya Siva Obeyesekere to handover several lands to the LRC. Listed among the properties were ‘Medalanda Estate in the Colombo District’ [listed under ‘c’] and ‘Keenagaskebella in Nuwara-Eliya [listed under ‘e’]. The ownership of these two lands, however, had been transferred to the Petitioner [Maligawa Tours and Export (PVT) Ltd] way back in 1982 and 1972 respectively. In the case of the land Keenagaskebella, the transfer had been made more than 41 years before the letter X5. It was submitted that the Petitioner has enjoyed both the ownership, and possession and further, utilised the two properties for various purposes since. It was revealed that, prior to receiving the letter X5, Deshamanya Siva Obeyesekere also had received several letters relating to some of her other properties, from the LRC, and had tendered an appeal to the 2nd Respondent [Director, District Land Reform Board, Nuwara-Eliya]. This letter of appeal (marked ‘X6’) had been copied to the then Legal Consultant for the LRC, Mahanama Thilekaratne.

Having been made aware of the attempts to take over the said properties, Chantal Obeyesekere (daughter of Deshamanya Siva Obeyesekere and as well as a Director of the Petitioner company) had met with Mahanama Thilekaratne to inquire about the matter and voice its grievance over the attempted takeover of lands which were lawfully conveyed over 30 years before. When the file pertaining to the lands was called for, it was observed that the file (bearing No. 2293) bore the endorsement “file closed”. Having been apprised of the situation, Mahanama Thilekaratne had made an endorsement and directed the conduct of an inquiry. The letter marked X6 contains the hand-written endorsement and directions dated 03.04.2013; and reads thus: “I have studied the files pertaining to this and the Director has no right or authority to intimidate persons like this. I recommend to have a full inquiry into this matter. Inform the Director not to take any action until the most essential inquiry is over.”

Despite the directions of the legal Consul

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top